Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 307

It’s time for SMSF accountants and advisers to be friends

From 1 July 2016, the Australian Financial Services (AFS) licensing regime applying to SMSF services provided by accountants changed such that they can no longer provide recommendations around establishing or winding up an interest in an SMSF unless they are appropriately licensed to do so.

For those holding licenses, a new “educational, experience and ethical standards” regime came into play from 1 January 2019, lifting the educational and experience requirements to be a licensed financial adviser.

Mainly for this reason, many accountants have chosen not to go down the licensing path and stick to what they do: accounting. Some – who had been setting up, running and winding up SMSFs for their clients for years with no input from licensed advisers - have been forced to significantly change their practices as a result.

At the same time, there were substantial changes to the superannuation laws in 2017 with the introduction of concepts such as Transfer Balance Caps (TBC), transitional CGT relief, and Total Superannuation Balances (TSB) as well as complexities around Exempt Current Pension Income (ECPI). These all have direct and substantial impact on SMSF trustees and members.

Never has it been more important for a collaborative approach between accountants and advisers on SMSF advice and services. And yet, in my experience as both an adviser to SMSFs and more recently as a technical SMSF specialist working with accountants, there is still push back between the two professions in some pockets of the industry.

(Big, fat disclaimer here: #notallaccountants #notalladvisers)

Friction between professionals

Just as the builder and the architect mix like oil and water, so too do the accountant and the adviser often clash. The accountant seeks the best tax outcome for their clients within the framework of the relevant laws. The adviser does too, whilst applying sensible investment outcomes and seeking to ensure solutions remain workable, understandable and affordable.

The goals of each profession are intersecting and certainly both parties are working for the common good of the client’s best interests. Why can’t they get along?

The problem is that the lines between the two functions have blurred. The regulatory system is not perfect and advisers are stepping into areas that were traditionally the domain of accountants.

We have moved into an era where different specialists either have to work together hand-in-glove, or upskill and deliberately cross over into each other’s territory.

Consider the introduction of the $1.6 million transfer balance cap 

Most retirees with substantial superannuation savings needed advice and assistance to prepare for the new rules and avoid penalties, and SMSF trustees in particular. Who do they turn to for this assistance?

This table summarises some of the issues involved in getting a fund TBC-ready.

And on it goes. Both the accountant (or SMSF administrator) and the adviser play complementary and vital roles, but with grey areas and crossing-over of responsibilities. Where once it was quite separate, so it’s easy to see how friction can occur.

SMSF trustees are caught in the middle

It’s a new world for SMSF trustees, too. A trustee heading into retirement who prefers to be self-directed in investment selection may not have an adviser on an ongoing basis. In the past, they looked to their accountant for tax optimisation strategies. However, the regulatory system now prevents the accountant from advising on starting pensions and the trustee is forced to see an adviser and pay for a full Statement of Advice. It was previously done as part of the accounting service.

I’m not saying that the new licensing requirements are all bad. Several years ago, I had the heart-breaking experience of a new client, a widow, who with her deceased husband had built up their business. They had sold it in retirement and put the proceeds into an SMSF on the advice of their long-standing and well-meaning friend and accountant.

Their accountant recommended that 100% of the $2 million cash be invested conservatively into mortgage funds. Safe as houses, right? Then the husband died, comfortable with the knowledge that he had ensured his wife was set up for life. Then the GFC struck, and she's now on the age pension.

A collaborative approach

With the new licensing regime bedded down, it’s time to bury the hatchet and for both sides to recognise that each brings essential expertise, experience and professionalism to the table.

The SMSF trustee who aligns with an accountant (or SMSF service provider) and a licensed financial adviser that can take a collaborative approach will gain the most, well ahead of the trustee who relies on two people who work separately. As an SMSF adviser, fund accountants often worked against me not with me. It cost the trustees in missed deadlines and lost opportunities to optimise the fund’s tax position and it was (frustratingly) completely out of my control.

Equally, it's often the other way around, where an adviser has made recommendations that frustrate accountants because they completely ignore important tax planning which the accountant has carefully crafted with the client over many years.

Client education is essential

I am a strong believer in client education, and this is absolutely essential for SMSF trustees. They have serious legal responsibilities and obligations to uphold. Failure to meet these obligations can result in adverse consequences which may be extremely costly.

A well-educated trustee can recognise opportunities or threats as they arise through legislative developments. Education puts them in a position to take action when required. The possible removal of franking credit refunds case in point. The informed trustee will look for solutions in anticipation of a possible change, and talk to their accountant and adviser about the best strategies.

Both the fund accountant and adviser have an important role in providing this education to trustees.

The accountant’s intimate understanding of SMSF matters such as segregation (or not) of assets, ECPI, and inhouse assets (to name a few) is just as vital as the adviser’s focus on wealth creation and retirement income through contributions, pension structure and investments.

In the world of SMSFs, an aligned accountant and financial adviser can make a formidable, synergistic team. Specialists who can’t be friends can be just the opposite.


Alex Denham is a Senior SMSF Specialist at Heffron SMSF Advisers. This article is general information and does not consider the circumstances of any individual.


Ructions in the SMSF market


Most viewed in recent weeks

Is it better to rent or own a home under the age pension?

With 62% of Australians aged 65 and over relying at least partially on the age pension, are they better off owning their home or renting? There is an extra pension asset allowance for those not owning a home.

Too many retirees miss out on this valuable super fund benefit

With 700 Australians retiring every day, retirement income solutions are more important than ever. Why do millions of retirees eligible for a more tax-efficient pension account hold money in accumulation?

Is the fossil fuel narrative simply too convenient?

A fund manager argues it is immoral to deny poor countries access to relatively cheap energy from fossil fuels. Wealthy countries must recognise the transition is a multi-decade challenge and continue to invest.

Reece Birtles on selecting stocks for income in retirement

Equity investing comes with volatility that makes many retirees uncomfortable. A focus on income which is less volatile than share prices, and quality companies delivering robust earnings, offers more reassurance.

Comparing generations and the nine dimensions of our well-being

Using the nine dimensions of well-being used by the OECD, and dividing Australians into Baby Boomers, Generation Xers or Millennials, it is surprisingly easy to identify the winners and losers for most dimensions.

Anton in 2006 v 2022, it's deja vu (all over again)

What was bothering markets in 2006? Try the end of cheap money, bond yields rising, high energy prices and record high commodity prices feeding inflation. Who says these are 'unprecedented' times? It's 2006 v 2022.

Latest Updates


Superannuation: a 30+ year journey but now stop fiddling

Few people have been closer to superannuation policy over the years than Noel Whittaker, especially when he established his eponymous financial planning business. He takes us on a quick guided tour.

Survey: share your retirement experiences

All Baby Boomers are now over 55 and many are either in retirement or thinking about a transition from work. But what is retirement like? Is it the golden years or a drag? Do you have tips for making the most of it?


Time for value as ‘promise generators’ fail to deliver

A $28 billion global manager still sees far more potential in value than growth stocks, believes energy stocks are undervalued including an Australian company, and describes the need for resilience in investing.


Paul Keating's long-term plans for super and imputation

Paul Keating not only designed compulsory superannuation but in the 30 years since its introduction, he has maintained the rage. Here are highlights of three articles on SG's origins and two more recent interviews.

Fixed interest

On interest rates and credit, do you feel the need for speed?

Central bank support for credit and equity markets is reversing, which has led to wider spreads and higher rates. But what does that mean and is it time to jump at higher rates or do they have some way to go?

Investment strategies

Death notices for the 60/40 portfolio are premature

Pundits have once again declared the death of the 60% stock/40% bond portfolio amid sharp declines in both stock and bond prices. Based on history, balanced portfolios are apt to prove the naysayers wrong, again.

Exchange traded products

ETFs and the eight biggest worries in index investing

Both passive investing and ETFs have withstood criticism as their popularity has grown. They have been blamed for causing bubbles, distorting the market, and concentrating share ownership. Are any of these criticisms valid?



© 2022 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. Any general advice or ‘regulated financial advice’ under New Zealand law has been prepared by Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892) and/or Morningstar Research Ltd, subsidiaries of Morningstar, Inc, without reference to your objectives, financial situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide (AU) and Financial Advice Provider Disclosure Statement (NZ). You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.

Website Development by Master Publisher.